#LeaveTheDark: Easy social media shares

My blog may be called “In The Dark” but that won’t stop me sharing this.

#LeaveTheDark

Yesterday we had a request for a shareable summary of the #LeaveTheDark manifesto. That’s quite difficult to do in brief. There’s a lot to it. A more complete manifesto will follow within the next few days.

But in the meantime we thought these little images might be helpful for people who’d like to spread the word a bit. There’s no issue with copyright or anything like that. We want and need people to share our stuff. That’s the only way we’ll reach enough people to turn last week’s idea into next year’s reality! And we will make this a reality.

So feel free to download and share these images across your networks. The more the merrier…

Leavethedark we are that movement we believe.pngleaveTheDark join us we are memeleaveTheDark Join us we need

Thankyou! Together we really can make a difference and turn back the growing swell of hatred that threatens to engulf our society.

View original post

10 Responses to “#LeaveTheDark: Easy social media shares”

  1. Michael Kenyon Says:

    Not much on the website about the neo-nazis in the Ukraine the EU and NATO are so keen to prop up! As John Pilger says Brexit might just prevent World War 3.

    http://johnpilger.com/articles/why-the-british-said-no-to-europe

    • telescoper Says:

      John Pilfer has completely lost it. He’s even endorsed Trump. BrExit won’t prevent anything as Britain has endorsed its own irrelevance.

    • telescoper Says:

      You are aware that Trump has effectively stated he will quit Nato? This increases the likelihood of ww3 dramatically.

      • Anton Garrett Says:

        For much of my life the Left (I am not talking about anybody known to me personally) has enjoyed grumbling about America while living in a freedom preserved by the American nuclear umbrella. Following the publication of the Mitrokhin Archive and other material from Moscow it is not seriously doubted that Moscow would have invaded Western Europe – indefensible by conventional means – but for this umbrella. Charles de Gaulle repeatedly exhorted Europe to stand on its own two feet against all threats, and I now believe that he was right about that.

  2. Michael Kenyon Says:

    https://newmatilda.com/2016/03/23/john-pilger-why-hillary-clinton-is-more-dangerous-than-donald-trump/

    Think he’s saying he is the lesser of two evils.

    Corbyn probably wants to quit NATO as well, but it isn’t politically possible for him to say it, just like he supported Brexit but had to tow party line.

    Corbin and Trump in power would certainly be interesting, we’ve had the McGuinness/Paisley love in so anything is possible!

  3. Anton Garrett Says:

    Why single out the far right? Is there not just as much hate within the far left? Don’t militant feminists hate just as much as misogynist men?

    We need to recognise that all human beings are the same, all capable of love and hate but more capable of hate; and do something about that. We need to recognise that the enemy is not people but belief systems, and that people holding beliefs we disagree with should be respected as people even while we disagree with what they say.

    There is a tension between freedom and order in society, though; between anarchy and totalitarianism. That is harder to resolve.

    • telescoper Says:

      Although I’d agree that the extreme left can be as scary as the extreme right in terms of behaviour, I don’t think it’s entirely symmetrical. There are clearly people on the left with racist attitudes – witness the problems in the Labour Party with antisemitism – but that seems rather different from the case of parties for which racism is actually the policy.

      And I think you’ll find that there are far more crimes committed by misogynist men against women than there are by feminists against men. Feminism is not simple to define, as it is an individual thing, but I don’t see the connection with hate at all. Most feminists I know simply want equality and freedom from prejudice (and harassment).

      • Anton Garrett Says:

        I did say *militant* feminists, and hate manifests in more ways than illegal behaviour.

        Actually I think the Labour party is not notably antisemitic in regard to individuals – witness the rise of the Milbands and Mandelson during Labour’s most recent tenure of office. I agree with those who say it is simply anti-Israel. But I do think that to avoid being called anti-semitic in its policies it should hold Israel’s neighbours to the same standards it holds Israel. That won’t be easy if Labour desires the Islamic vote in the UK.

      • “There are clearly people on the left with racist attitudes – witness the problems in the Labour Party with antisemitism – but that seems rather different from the case of parties for which racism is actually the policy.”

        I think the extreme left can be just as bad (assuming, say, Stalin or Pol Pot are considered to be part of the extreme left), though the motivation is usually not pseudoscientific racism which is often the case on the extreme right. (There is also confusion among the moderate left between this sort of pseudoscientific racism in the style of the right, which is scientifically simply wrong (although, theoretically, different qualities of “human” races could exist at the same time, and probably did in the past, though even this would not justify hatred), and criticism of practices which occur in other cultures, such as FGM, famously defended by Germaine Greer (who probably considers herself to be on the left as well as a feminist) since criticizing it would be cultural colonialism.)

        “And I think you’ll find that there are far more crimes committed by misogynist men against women than there are by feminists against men.”

        Certainly true.

        “Feminism is not simple to define, as it is an individual thing, but I don’t see the connection with hate at all.”

        I would definitely put Andrea Dworkin in the “hate” category.

        “Most feminists I know simply want equality and freedom from prejudice (and harassment).”

        Certainly true.

      • “I agree with those who say it is simply anti-Israel.”

        A huge difference from being anti-Semitic. Huge.

        “But I do think that to avoid being called anti-semitic in its policies it should hold Israel’s neighbours to the same standards it holds Israel.”

        Indeed. While it is good to oppose oppression, it is a common mistake of the Left to assume that the oppressed are necessarily better than their oppressors, which I think explains much pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel sentiment.

        On the other hand, Israel’s neighbours care little if at all about what “Western” countries think. Israel, seeing itself culturally and historically closer to the West, might, so criticism of wrong Isreali politics might have some chance of success. There is little point in criticizing the IS or the Taliban. As you note, though, one shouldn’t give the impression that one is less critical of them.

        “That won’t be easy if Labour desires the Islamic vote in the UK.”

        This assumes that many Muslims are automatically pro-Palestine, or pro-PLO, and anti-Israel. I don’t know if that is true. Certainly not all Catholics support the IRA.

        In any case, “desiring the vote” is dangerous. Ideally, one should say “this is what I want; if you want it, vote for me”, though practically tactical thoughts play a role as well, particularly concerning which aspects of one’s platform one wants to emphasize.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: